IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v7y2015i8p9924-9942d53129.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

GIS Based Measurement and Regulatory Zoning of Urban Ecological Vulnerability

Author

Listed:
  • Xiaorui Zhang

    (Department of Urban Planning, Hefei University of Technology, Hefei 230009, China)

  • Zhenbo Wang

    (Institute of Geographical Sciences and Natural Resources Research, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100101, China
    Key Laboratory of Regional Sustainable Development Modeling, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100101, China)

  • Jing Lin

    (Institute of Geographical Sciences and Natural Resources Research, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100101, China
    Key Laboratory of Regional Sustainable Development Modeling, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100101, China)

Abstract

Urban ecological vulnerability is measured on the basis of ecological sensitivity and resilience based on the concept analysis of vulnerability. GIS-based multicriteria decision analysis (GIS-MCDA) methods are used, supported by the spatial analysis tools of GIS, to define different levels of vulnerability for areas of the urban ecology. These areas are further classified into different types of regulatory zones. Taking the city of Hefei in China as the empirical research site, this study uses GIS-MCDA, including the index system, index weights and overlay rules, to measure the degree of its ecological vulnerability on the GIS platform. There are eight indices in the system. Raking and analytical hierarchy process (AHP) methods are used to calculate index weights according to the characteristics of the index system. The integrated overlay rule, including selection of the maximum value, and weighted linear combination (WLC) are applied as the overlay rules. In this way, five types of vulnerability areas have been classified as follows: very low vulnerability, low vulnerability, medium vulnerability, high vulnerability and very high vulnerability. They can be further grouped into three types of regulatory zone of ecological green line, ecological grey line and ecological red line. The study demonstrates that ecological green line areas are the largest (53.61% of the total study area) and can be intensively developed; ecological grey line areas (19.59% of the total area) can serve as the ecological buffer zone, and ecological red line areas (26.80%) cannot be developed and must be protected. The results indicate that ecological green line areas may provide sufficient room for future urban development in Hefei city. Finally, the respective regulatory countermeasures are put forward. This research provides a scientific basis for decision-making around urban ecological protection, construction and sustainable development. It also provides theoretical method references for future research into urban ecological vulnerability, including the introduction of GIS-MCDA methods into the field of urban ecological vulnerability, which expands the application for these techniques.

Suggested Citation

  • Xiaorui Zhang & Zhenbo Wang & Jing Lin, 2015. "GIS Based Measurement and Regulatory Zoning of Urban Ecological Vulnerability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(8), pages 1-19, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:7:y:2015:i:8:p:9924-9942:d:53129
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/7/8/9924/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/7/8/9924/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Md. Bhuiyan & Dushmanta Dutta, 2012. "Analysis of flood vulnerability and assessment of the impacts in coastal zones of Bangladesh due to potential sea-level rise," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 61(2), pages 729-743, March.
    2. Indranil Dutta & James Foster & Ajit Mishra, 2011. "On measuring vulnerability to poverty," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 37(4), pages 743-761, October.
    3. W. Adger & P. Kelly, 1999. "Social Vulnerability to Climate Change and the Architecture of Entitlements," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 4(3), pages 253-266, September.
    4. Sarah Wolf, 2012. "Vulnerability and risk: comparing assessment approaches," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 61(3), pages 1099-1113, April.
    5. Kalyani Chatterjea, 2011. "Severe wet spells and vulnerability of urban slopes: case of Singapore," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 56(1), pages 1-18, January.
    6. Neil Adger, W., 1999. "Social Vulnerability to Climate Change and Extremes in Coastal Vietnam," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 27(2), pages 249-269, February.
    7. H. Duzgun & M. Yucemen & H. Kalaycioglu & K. Celik & S. Kemec & K. Ertugay & A. Deniz, 2011. "An integrated earthquake vulnerability assessment framework for urban areas," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 59(2), pages 917-947, November.
    8. El-Rashidy, Rawia Ahmed & Grant-Muller, Susan M., 2014. "An assessment method for highway network vulnerability," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 34(C), pages 34-43.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Lin Wang & Guofang Hu & Yaojie Yue & Xinyue Ye & Min Li & Jintao Zhao & Jinhong Wan, 2016. "GIS-Based Risk Assessment of Hail Disasters Affecting Cotton and Its Spatiotemporal Evolution in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(3), pages 1-20, February.
    2. Ljubomir Gigović & Dragan Pamučar & Zoran Bajić & Milić Milićević, 2016. "The Combination of Expert Judgment and GIS-MAIRCA Analysis for the Selection of Sites for Ammunition Depots," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(4), pages 1-30, April.
    3. Zhengsong Lin & Xinyue Ye & Qian Wei & Fan Xin & Zhang Lu & Sonali Kudva & Qiwen Dai, 2017. "Ecosystem Services Value Assessment and Uneven Development of the Qingjiang River Basin in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(12), pages 1-17, December.
    4. Qian Ding & Xun Shi & Dafang Zhuang & Yong Wang, 2018. "Temporal and Spatial Distributions of Ecological Vulnerability under the Influence of Natural and Anthropogenic Factors in an Eco-Province under Construction in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-23, August.
    5. Majid Ebrahimi & Hamid Nejadsoleymani & Mohammad Reza Mansouri Daneshvar, 2019. "Land suitability map and ecological carrying capacity for the recognition of touristic zones in the Kalat region, Iran: a multi-criteria analysis based on AHP and GIS," Asia-Pacific Journal of Regional Science, Springer, vol. 3(3), pages 697-718, October.
    6. Razvan Serbu & Bogdan Marza & Sorin Borza, 2016. "A Spatial Analytic Hierarchy Process for Identification of Water Pollution with GIS Software in an Eco-Economy Environment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(11), pages 1-25, November.
    7. Rong Guo & Yujing Bai, 2019. "Simulation of an Urban-Rural Spatial Structure on the Basis of Green Infrastructure Assessment: The Case of Harbin, China," Land, MDPI, vol. 8(12), pages 1-21, December.
    8. Tim Johansson & Eugenia Segerstedt & Thomas Olofsson & Mats Jakobsson, 2016. "Revealing Social Values by 3D City Visualization in City Transformations," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(2), pages 1-17, February.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Jones, Lindsey & d'Errico, Marco, 2019. "Whose resilience matters? Like-for-like comparison of objective and subjective evaluations of resilience," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 1-1.
    2. Mook Bangalore & Andrew Smith & Ted Veldkamp, 2019. "Exposure to Floods, Climate Change, and Poverty in Vietnam," Economics of Disasters and Climate Change, Springer, vol. 3(1), pages 79-99, April.
    3. Delphine Boutin, 2014. "Climate vulnerability, communities' resilience and child labour," Revue d'économie politique, Dalloz, vol. 124(4), pages 625-638.
    4. H.M. Tuihedur Rahman & Gordon M. Hickey, 2020. "An Analytical Framework for Assessing Context-Specific Rural Livelihood Vulnerability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(14), pages 1-26, July.
    5. Barnett, Jon, 2001. "Adapting to Climate Change in Pacific Island Countries: The Problem of Uncertainty," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 29(6), pages 977-993, June.
    6. Jia Xu & Makoto Takahashi, 2021. "Progressing vulnerability of the immigrants in an urbanizing village in coastal China," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 23(5), pages 8012-8026, May.
    7. Chiarity Zetem Chiambah & Cordelia G. Kometa, 2022. "Rainfall Variability and Food Crop Vulnerability in Ndu Sub-Division, North West Region of Cameroon," Journal of Geography and Geology, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 11(3), pages 1-39, September.
    8. Sanjit Maiti & Sujeet Jha & Sanchita Garai & Arindam Nag & R. Chakravarty & K. Kadian & B. Chandel & K. Datta & R. Upadhyay, 2015. "Assessment of social vulnerability to climate change in the eastern coast of India," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 131(2), pages 287-306, July.
    9. repec:unu:wpaper:wp2012-082 is not listed on IDEAS
    10. Ahmad Taki & Viet Ha Xuan Doan, 2022. "A New Framework for Sustainable Resilient Houses on the Coastal Areas of Khanh Hoa, Vietnam," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(13), pages 1-31, June.
    11. Williamson, Tim & Hesseln, Hayley & Johnston, Mark, 2012. "Adaptive capacity deficits and adaptive capacity of economic systems in climate change vulnerability assessment," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 15(C), pages 160-166.
    12. W.Neil Adger, 2001. "Scales of governance and environmental justice for adaptation and mitigation of climate change," Journal of International Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 13(7), pages 921-931.
    13. Arouri, Mohamed & Nguyen, Cuong & Youssef, Adel Ben, 2015. "Natural Disasters, Household Welfare, and Resilience: Evidence from Rural Vietnam," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 59-77.
    14. Hochachka, Gail, 2021. "Integrating the four faces of climate change adaptation: Towards transformative change in Guatemalan coffee communities," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 140(C).
    15. Clara Champalle & James D. Ford & Mya Sherman, 2015. "Prioritizing Climate Change Adaptations in Canadian Arctic Communities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(7), pages 1-25, July.
    16. Danielle Emma Johnson & Karen Fisher & Meg Parsons, 2022. "Diversifying Indigenous Vulnerability and Adaptation: An Intersectional Reading of Māori Women’s Experiences of Health, Wellbeing, and Climate Change," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(9), pages 1-40, May.
    17. Donna Hornby & Adrian Nel & Samuel Chademana & Nompilo Khanyile, 2018. "A Slipping Hold? Farm Dweller Precarity in South Africa’s Changing Agrarian Economy and Climate," Land, MDPI, vol. 7(2), pages 1-25, March.
    18. Piya, Luni & Maharjan, Keshav Lall & Joshi, Niraj Prakash, 2012. "Vulnerability of rural households to climate change and extremes: Analysis of Chepang households in the Mid-Hills of Nepal," 2012 Conference, August 18-24, 2012, Foz do Iguacu, Brazil 126191, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    19. Erin C. Pischke & M. Azahara Mesa-Jurado & Amarella Eastmond & Jesse Abrams & Kathleen E. Halvorsen, 2018. "Community perceptions of socioecological stressors and risk-reducing strategies in Tabasco, Mexico," Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, Springer;Association of Environmental Studies and Sciences, vol. 8(4), pages 441-451, December.
    20. Kathryn J. Bowen & Sharon Friel & Kristie Ebi & Colin D. Butler & Fiona Miller & Anthony J. McMichael, 2011. "Governing for a Healthy Population: Towards an Understanding of How Decision-Making Will Determine Our Global Health in a Changing Climate," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 9(1), pages 1-18, December.
    21. Paolo Prosperi & Thomas Allen & Bruce Cogill & Martine Padilla & Iuri Peri, 2016. "Towards metrics of sustainable food systems: a review of the resilience and vulnerability literature," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 36(1), pages 3-19, March.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:7:y:2015:i:8:p:9924-9942:d:53129. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.